Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zevtos/agentpipeWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/commands/zevtos/agentpipe/fix)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/zevtos/agentpipe/fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/zevtos/agentpipe/fix/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/zevtos/agentpipe/fix"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/zevtos/agentpipe/fix.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00027 | $0.00661 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00264 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00132 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00066 |
Grade A, and why
fix scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 79 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are orchestrating a bug fix. Be systematic — don't jump to solutions before understanding the root cause.
Context
@CLAUDE.md
Bug Report
$ARGUMENTS
Pipeline
Step 1: Investigate
Before touching any code:
- Reproduce the bug — understand exactly what triggers it
- Read the relevant code paths (use Grep/Glob to find related files)
- Check git blame/log for recent changes in the affected area
- Read error logs if available
- Identify the root cause — not just the symptom
- Check if this is a known pattern (race condition? null reference? off-by-one? missing validation?)
Present your findings:
- Symptom: What the user sees
- Root Cause: Why it happens (be specific — point to exact code)
- Impact: How many users/flows are affected
- Fix Strategy: What needs to change and why
Ask: "Is this the right diagnosis? Should I proceed with this fix approach?" Wait for confirmation.
Step 2: Fix
Implement the fix:
- Make the minimal change that addresses the root cause
- Don't refactor surrounding code — fix the bug only
- Add input validation or guard clauses if the bug was caused by unexpected input
- Add logging if the bug was hard to diagnose (help future debugging)
- Handle the error gracefully if it's an edge case that can't be prevented
Step 3: Review (Reviewer Agent)
Run the reviewer agent:
"Review this bug fix for: $ARGUMENTS
Root cause: [paste root cause from Step 1]
Changes made: [describe the fix]
Verify:
- Does the fix actually address the root cause?
- Does it introduce any regressions?
- Are edge cases handled?
- Is error handling appropriate?
- Could this bug manifest elsewhere? (similar patterns in the codebase)"
If the reviewer finds issues, fix them and re-verify.
Step 4: Regression Test (Tester Agent)
Run the tester agent:
"Write a regression test for this bug: $ARGUMENTS
Root cause: [paste root cause]
The fix: [describe what changed]
Write tests that:
- Reproduce the original bug (this test would have FAILED before the fix)
- Verify the fix works correctly
- Cover related edge cases that could cause similar issues
- Follow existing test patterns in the project"
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 1mo ago First seen · 79 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A ceb1c693fd09
fix is a command published in the GitHub repository zevtos/agentpipe (11 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 661 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
qa-changes
This skill should be used when the user asks to "QA a pull request", "test PR changes", "verify a PR works", "functionally test changes", or when an automated workflow triggers QA validation of code changes. Provides a structured methodology for setting up the environment, exercising changed behavior, and reporting…
react-native
Command "react-native" from getsentry/toolkit, covering examples, also associate with a release and distribution(s), xcode build step (react-native xcode) and important notes.
doctor
Diagnosticar y reparar problemas del framework Don Cheli, git y entorno. Usa cuando el usuario dice "doctor", "problemas del framework", "don cheli no funciona", "repair Don Cheli", "debug setup", "setup broken", "framework broken", "reparar entorno". Detecta y repara issues de configuración, git y dependencias…
doctor
Badi configuration validation. Checks all Badi components and produces a diagnostic report.
http-service
Build, review or debug a Bun HTTP service. Loads the http-service skill, then works the task through its workflow.
auditar-cascading
Invoca cascading-failures-auditor — audita serviço para 5 triggers de cascade (sem timeout, retry sem jitter, sem circuit breaker, sem deadline, queue unbounded) e gera CASCADING-AUDIT.md.